Wednesday, April 25, 2018

Well Said: Realistic Literature Versus Fantasy Literature

Oftentimes fantasy literature is criticized exactly for being escapist; that it tries to create in people a feeling of another world they can go to and that distracts them from the important things they are supposed to be doing in this present world. I think there is a distinct and unpleasant whiff of the most repellent elements of Marxism and Leninism in that criticism of escape. ... It subordinates literature and it makes it a kind of propaganda, rather than a kind of art.
Michael C. Drout; Rings, Swords, and Monsters course
We don't need explanation about why I shared this do we? Preaching to the Choir, yep that's what we do here.


  1. Dearest Julie,
    much as I hate to contradict here: There has always been a fantastical or utopian element to Marxism (and to a lesser degree even to Leninism), namely the idea of a better world to come and a better place for mankind. We know how well that one worked, and in some aspects we may even really know why, but that is beside the point. It is one thing to despise Marxism AND to despise the arrogance of realistic literature towards fantasy. But I do not think that Marxism and vulgar realism are necessarily intertwined in the way Drout insinuates. The affect against Fantastika, against "Escapism" has for a very long time been the hallmark of the "honest salesman", the "realistic politician" against anything that could not be turned into money and career. A society and a person, that is unable to think of another way of life than their own, will always be disturbed by the "one commandment" of all (fantastic and/or realistic) literature worth reading: "It's like this. It could be different."

    1. I haven't read Marx (or Lenin) so your point may be valid. :-)